"Norming Guns Away"

From the Anchorage 2nd Amendment Task Force, in today's e-mail:


The following was sent to us by our friends and allies at AMGA. It emphasizes how important it is that we stay vigilant and active in the preservation of our rights. Thanks to AMGA.
The authors wish to thank Dillon Precision Products, The Blue Press, for permission to reprint & distribute the following article.


Reference: Dillon Precision Products, 800-762-3845, www.DillonPrecision.com; The Blue Press, Dec 2010, Pg 48-49; Reprint; "Norming Guns Away: Why We Need to be Concerned About the UN"

Norming Guns Away: Why We Need to be Concerned About the UN
by Paul Gallant, Alan Chwick, and Joanne Eisen

We American gun-owners need to become more familiar with the process of
"norming." The "norm" of civilian disarmament already surrounds our country
and has the potential to nullify our Second Amendment right. When global
firearm-prohibition ists speak about "norming," they are actually discussing
the process wherein society becomes increasingly hostile to the possession
of arms in the hands of civilians.

This standard, or `norm,' was deliberately created during several decades of
lies about the safety and use of firearms, their benefits to society, and
the kind of people who possess them. And yet, we gun-owners remain unaware
of its ramifications and its dangers.

During the creation of this norm, we have seen the prohibitionists lie time
and time again, magnifying the costs to society of private firearm
ownership, minimizing their benefits, and creating widespread fear in the
process. We know we're on the side of truth because we don't need to
manipulate the facts to fit our philosophy, as do the prohibitionists. In
two decades of firearms research and experience, we have never seen a
deliberate attempt by unbiased firearm researchers to obfuscate data.

The more people who accept the norm, the stronger the norm becomes. Owen
Greene of Saferworld, an anti-gun non-governmental organization (NGO),
elaborated: "It is generally agreed that controls on possession by civilians
of Small Arms and Light Weapons [SALW, an ambiguous group of weapons that
includes ordinary firearms] are a critical element of national controls to
prevent, combat, and reduce SALW trafficking, proliferation and misuse."

Greene is secure in the knowledge that this norm already has extremely
vigorous and widespread global support.

The new norm does not allow for self-defense, as government intends to
provide that service for us. Even if one might actually comply with strict
regulations and even if one might actually be permitted to keep his/her
sporting gun at home, instead of being locked up at the local range, these
guns will never be available for emergency use.

One of the most damning ramifications of the new norm is that those few
remaining gun-owners will be looked upon with disdain.

This is the norm that is presently being codified into a global
legally-binding Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that will encompass all conventional
weapons.

It might be possible for our laws to be changed because of this treaty, even
without a Presidential signature, or Senate ratification. The ATT is set to
become the global norm, and the global firearm-prohibition ists would only
need to wait for an opportune time to act. We expect that 175 of the
approximately 200 nations in today's world would sign onto the ATT. Although
many of these nations will sign with no expectation of complying with its
provisions, this will not affect the strength of the norm.

According to attorney Joseph Bruce Alonzo, "gun control laws could affect
United States parties in the event that gun control becomes a customary
international law [i.e. becomes a norm].. Non consensual customary
international law may arise as a result of international practice. This
international practice may be evidenced by events not approved by the United
States but eventually held binding on the United States."

That's how this norm, or soft law, has the potential to trump the Second
Amendment.

John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, recognized the
norming process, and rejected it as being destructive to our Constitution.
Expressing his displeasure, he wrote: "Much of the development of norming
comes as a result of people who are dissatisfied with political outcomes
they have achieved at the state and federal level and who are determined to
take their argument into the broader international context, who see the
norming process as the way to constrain the United States."

There is another norm-our norm-which was bequeathed to us by our Founding
Fathers. Ed Laurence of the Monterey Institute of International Studies
complained : "An opposing norm that favors continued high levels of arms
sales-based on the belief that citizens have the "right" to buy guns for
self-defense, self-determination, entertainment, or to provide for their
families-is preventing the development of a global consensus on small arms
policy."

We are the last remaining hope for the sovereignty of individuals and the
civilian possession of firearms. U.S. civilians own about 270 million
firearms, about 30% of the total global stockpile of 875 million firearms.
But we estimate that only about 5 million people, out of approximately 70-80
million American gun-owners, have joined in one or more activist groups that
have been formed to protect our right to private firearm ownership.

This simply is not enough. We must get gun-owners out of the closet and
actively working hard with us.

How undamaged we and our rights emerge from this United Nations firestorm,
that will engulf us for the next 5-10 years, depends upon how willing we all
are to accept our responsibilities today.